Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist)

On Unity of Marxist-Leninists

CPC(M-L)’s Consistent Line on the Question of Opposing Opportunism and Building the Unity of the Marxist-Leninists

A PCDN Editorial Comment

Certain comrades and friends of the Party have asked us why, since we consider certain organisations and individuals to be erroneous and go to the extent of pointing out that they are revisionists, trotskyists, anarcho-syndicalists and opportunists of various sorts, does the Party issue the call to unite with them. How can Marxist-Leninists unite with the revisionists, trotskyists, anarcho-syndicalists and opportunists? Certain friends of the Party are puzzled by this. So this editorial is written to explain the Party’s view on the question. We will answer the question-point by point: 1) The task of building the unity of the Marxist-Leninists; 2) The task of opposing revisionism, trotskyism, anarcho-syndicalism and opportunism.

The following quotation from Lenin explains the necessity of opposing revisionism, trotskyism, anarcho-syndicalism and opportunism as a very important part of the fight against imperialism. Lenin says:

The receipt of high monopoly profits by the capitalists in one of the numerous branches of industry, in one of the numerous countries, etc., makes it economically possible for them to bribe certain sections of the workers, and for a time a fairly considerable minority of them, and win them to the side of the bourgeoisie of a given industry or given nation against all the others. The intensification of antagonisms between imperialist nations for the division of the world increases this striving. And so there is created that bond between imperialism and opportunism, which revealed itself first and most clearly in England, owing to the fact that certain features of imperialist development were observable there much earlier than in other countries. Some writers, L. Martov, for example, are prone to wave aside the connection between imperialism and opportunism in the working-class movement – a particularly glaring fact at the present time – by resorting to ’official optimism’ (a la Kautsky and Huysmans) like the following: the cause of the opponents of capitalism would be hopeless if it were precisely progressive capitalism that led to the increase of opportunism, or, if it were precisely the best paid workers who were inclined towards opportunism, etc. We must have no illusions about ’optimism’ of this kind. It is optimism in regard to opportunism; it is optimism which serves to conceal opportunism. As a matter of fact, the extraordinary rapidity and the particularly revolting character of the development of opportunism is by no means a guarantee that its victory will be durable: the rapid growth of a malignant abscess on a healthy body can only cause it to burst more quickly and thus relieve the body of it. The most dangerous of all in this respect are those who do not wish to understand that the fight against imperialism is a sham and humbug unless it is inseparably bound up with the fight against opportunism. [1]

Canada is one of the countries that is subject to oppression by U.S. imperialism but, at the same time, the monopoly capitalists in Canada gain from the U.S. imperialist exploitation of the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. A labour aristocracy has come into being and has entrenched itself as the social prop of U.S. imperialism and monopoly capitalism in Canada. The close allies of this labour aristocracy are certain intellectuals in the universities. Indeed, “the fight against imperialism (will be) a sham and humbug unless it is inseparably bound up with the fight against opportunism”. In terms of the Canadian conditions, this underscores the necessity of struggling against the labour aristocracy and their allies in the universities. The struggle against the labour aristocracy and various intellectuals, those who make up the social strata that acts as the social prop of imperialism and monopoly capitalism, is mainly political. It is mainly against the political trends which advocate the interests of the labour aristocrats and their allies. At this time in Canada, the political parties representing these political trends are the New Democratic Party and the so-called “Communist” Party of Canada. It is these parties which promote revisionism, trotskyism, anarcho-syndicalism and rank opportunism in the working class movement and are the political prop of imperialism and social-imperialism. Struggle against the politics of the NDP and the so-called “Communist” Party of Canada is an important part of the struggle against imperialism.

At this time, however, the situation is more complicated still. As imperialism and social-imperialism suffer hard blows at the hands of the people of Asia, Africa and Latin America and from the workers of the capitalist and revisionist countries, revisionism, trotskyism, anarcho-syndicalism and opportunism raise their head in new forms and new disguises. Today’s revisionists, trotskyists, anarcho-syndicalists and opportunists do not call themselves supporters of Soviet social-imperialism and nor do they villify China; in fact, internationally, they take the stand of opposing Soviet social-imperialism and U.S. imperialism and supporting China. On the national level, however, their political line fares no better than that of the old-type revisionists within the NDP and of the modern revisionists in the so-called “Communist” Party of Canada. Furthermore, they do not like to connect themselves with trotskyism and thus they create maximum confusion within the Marxist-Leninist circles and hide their real character of being revisionists, trotskyists, anarcho-syndicalists and opportunists of various sorts.

For us, to unite the Marxist-Leninists it is absolutely necessary to struggle against revisionism, trotskyism, anarcho-syndicalism and opportunism. At the same time, we must be careful not to lump everyone together in one camp and thus do damage to the revolutionary movement. The line of the Party on this question is to vigorously and firmly oppose all the opportunist political lines, to resolutely criticise all those who are pursuing these opportunist political lines irrespective of what they call themselves, and to wage an irreconcilable struggle against these elements. At the same time, our Party stands for the unity of all Marxist-Leninists, is against circle mentality and stands for the building of one political party of the proletariat based on Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought. It is this correct attitude of ours which some comrades and friends do not understand. To these comrades and friends we point out that unity can only be based on struggle and that we cannot remain silent while certain groups and individuals push their opportunist political lines. At the same time, we point out to them that we stand for unity and are all too enthusiastic to unite with anyone who agrees that as first principle, all Marxist-Leninists should be in one Party.

Certain comrades and friends also raise questions about how the struggle against these opportunist political lines should be waged. In the practical movement, the opportunists are all those who are unwilling to sit together with others and sort out their differences. In other words, we adhere to the position that all those who call themselves Marxist-Leninists should sit together and sort out various questions of a theoretical and practical nature. We hold that there is no such thing as “ideological struggle” in the abstract. We hold that we should firmly oppose revisionism, trotskyism, anarcho-syndicalism and other opportunist trends, and at the same time that all Marxist-Leninists should be in one Party where they wage ideological struggle as to what is the correct or incorrect line for the Party. Ideological struggle without Party discipline is to merely engage in the bourgeois pursuit of having endless discussions without reaching any conclusions. Meanwhile, those Marxist-Leninists who are outside the Party should sit together with Party comrades to sort out certain questions relating to the theory and the tactics of Canadian revolution. This means that various individuals representing the different organisations should sit together and work out their theoretical and tactical positions in a scientific manner, at the same time keeping in mind the aim of agreeing to one correct theoretical and tactical line for the Canadian revolution. Not to join the Party and not to sit together to deal with questions relating to the theory and tactics of Canadian revolution amounts to opportunism. While our Party opposes this opportunism, we have by no means given up the struggle to unite the Marxist-Leninists. On the contrary, we have intensified it.

When we publish our criticism of MREQ, it is not for the purpose of waging ideological struggle. It is for the purpose of presenting correct theory and tactics for the Canadian revolution and opposing MREQ’s rank opportunism. No sooner had we published criticism of MREQ than various individuals erroneously accused us of putting MREQ in the enemy camp. Comrades and friends should seriously consider this charge. It is not we who have put MREQ in the enemy camp, it is MREQ’s rank opportunism which has led them into the enemy camp. We would sincerely like MREQ to oppose its rank opportunism and join the workers’ movement. Comrades and friends should intensify their struggle against opportunism and call upon everyone to do likewise. We do not consider MREQ to be an enemy at any level. They are not the main opportunist trend in Canada. The main opportunist trend is led by the NDP and the so-called “Communist” Party of Canada as well as the trotskyists and their fellow-travellers. We should oppose this main trend. MREQ represents a secondary opportunist trend in the sense that even though their theory and tactics for the Canadian revolution are based on opporutnism, their activities do not amount to much. If they persist in pushing their opportunism, they will sooner or later merge with the main old and new revisionist or trotskyist trends. We hope that MREQ does overcome its rank opportunism, adopts Marxism-Leninism and joins the Marxist-Leninist movement. Our articles dealing with them are written in this light.

Our Party will persist in its consistent line of opposing opportunism and building the unity of the Marxist-Leninists. We will always guard as sacred, our right to criticise anyone who is doing damage to the working class movement and to the Canadian revolution. At the same time, we will persist in working to build the unity of all Marxist-Leninists. As the enemy is rotting with every passing day, it is placing all sorts of nefarious obstacles in the revolutionary path. Take as an example MREQ’s political line that does not consider U.S. imperialism and the Canadian monopoly capitalist class as the main enemy. According to MREQ, the principal contradiction in Canada is between the “bourgeoisie and the proletariat”. Is this not the same line given by the NDP and the revisionists, the anarcho-syndicalists, and the opportunists as well as the trotskyists and neo-trotskyists? But the NDP, the revisionists and the trotskyists do not swear by the name of Mao Tsetung Thought. MREQ does. This shows that MREQ follows the line of the NDP, the revisionists and the trotskyists in the guise of following Mao Tsetung Thought. There are two questions to be sorted out about Canada: 1) Is Canada a dependent monopoly capitalist system or not? In other words, is the economic system in Canada dominated by finance capital and is this finance capital dominated by U.S. finance capital or not? 2) If this much is acknowledged, then is the main struggle in Canada against U.S. dominated finance capitalism or not?

MREQ, which claims to be an avid supporter of China, in fact opposes everything China, the Communist Party of China and Chairman Mao Tsetung stand for.

The January 8 People’s Daily article entitled “Year of turbulence, year of victory” wrote: “Lenin points out: ’An essential feature of imperialism is the rivalry between several great powers in the striving for hegemony.’ Ever since Soviet social-imperialism came into being, there has been contention for world hegemony between U.S. imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism.” The Communist Party of China pointed out in 1963: “In the capitalist countries which U.S. imperialism controls or is trying to control, the working class and the people should direct their attacks mainly against U.S. imperialism, but also against their own monopoly capitalists and other reactionary forces who are betraying the national interests.”[2] Does MREQ pay attention to what the Communist Party of China advises? No! They merely strike a pose as the followers of the Communist Party of China but, in practice, carry on the same opportunist position promoted by the old and new revisionists, trotskyists, anarcho-syndicalists and opportunists of all sorts. MREQ acknowledges the penetration of U.S. imperialism in Canada but not its domination. MREQ peddles the theory that Canada is itself an “imperialist” country. Even if for the sake of argument we concede that this is so, the struggle between the “bourgeoisie and the proletariat” still cannot be considered as the main struggle. But we do not concede that Canada is an imperialist country. Lenin points out in his pamphlet, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, that

Special attention has been devoted in this pamphlet to a criticism of ’Kautskyism’, the international ideological trend represented in all countries of the world by the ’most prominent theoreticians’ and leaders of the Second International (Otto Bauer and Co. in Austria, Ramsay MacDonald and others in England, Albert Thomas in France, etc. etc.,) and a multitude of Socialists, reformists, pacifists, bourgeois democrats and parsons.

This ideological trend is, on the one hand, a product of the disintegration and decay of the Second International and, on the other hand, the inevitable fruit of the ideology of the petty bourgeoisie, who, by the whole of their conditions of life, are held captive to bourgeois and democratic prejudices. [3]

MREQ’s ideology is the reflection of the further decay of imperialism, the further decay of Khrushchovite revisionism. This ideology is the ideology of Stanley Ryerson, Jack Scott and others. It is the product of the decay and disintegration of the revisionist party. We will deal with Ryerson and Scott in the not too distant future. In order for MREQ to advance, they have to oppose opportunism, but MREQ waves the red flag of Mao Tsetung Thought in order to oppose it. Their flag is the tattered flag of revisionism kept festering by Ryerson and Scott and others within the workers movement in Canada.

Although the unity of the Marxist-Leninists can only be built in struggle against revisionism, Marxist-Leninists must, as a first principle, unite. This means that those who call themselves Marxist-Leninists should be in one Party and wage struggle against incorrect political lines within the Party on the basis of opposing the main enemy – U.S. imperialism and the Canadian monopoly capitalist class and all the opportunist trends. This is what the unity of the Marxist-Leninists in the face of the enemy means. Anyone who does not wish to build the unity of the Marxist-Leninists in the face of the enemy and at the same time claims to be a Marxist-Leninist must be denounced as a rank opportunist hiding behind the sign-board of Marxism-Leninism.

Footnotes

[2]“The Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in reply to the Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union of March 30, 1963”, A Proposal Concerning the General Line of the International Communist Movement, Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1963, p. 18